Monday, August 13, 2018

"Everytown" campaign to limit Constitution

EVERYTOWN FOR ... whatever .... wants to undermine MY RIGHT to defend my person, my family, and my property from would-be criminals who are younger, stronger and more violent.

(Yes, they want to undermine your 2nd Amendment rights, too.   But I take their attack personally, so this is all about me.  If you feel the same way, you can write your own damn article.)

EVERYTOWN uses loaded phrases such as "common-sense public safety measures"  to obfuscate their intent to limit my American freedoms.

They think that "local governments" should have the power to legislate against my constitutional rights.

They blame the only organized effort to support the constitution (cough NRA cough) for the fact that *only* 40 states defend my rights, even if EVERYTOWN apparently thinks I'm too irresponsible to deserve those rights.
 (I wonder why the other 10 states don't think I'm competent to make my own decisions.  My country liked me just fine when they drafted me in 1969 and sent me to Viet Nam. Oh, and they gave me a gun, too!)
Here's what Everytown for not-me has to say:

Sunday, August 12, 2018

California Scheming: 9th Circuit Court Findings (Microstamping by firearms)

Microstamping in California!

As nearly as I can tell, the Ninth Circuit Court has decided that California can legally impose "broad" restrictions on "acceptable" firearms.

(NOTE:  the following two paragraphs are ALL "Copy & Paste" quotes;  see the links for details.  I haven't yet had the time to drill-down to the logic of either the order or the interpretation by a 3rd party blogger.   I offer minimal interpretation or commentary at this time. Some phrases are high-lighted for your attention, not because they are embedded in the original text.)
GUN WATCH: Ninth Circuit Panel Rules CA Unsafe Handgun Act not Covered by Second Amendment: The key to the decision is the Ninth Circuit's hostility to a broad reading of the Second Amendment. The Circuit, in it's en banc rulings, such as Peruta, Tiexeira v. County of Alameda, and in a three judge panel, Silvester v. Harris, has consistently worked to restrict Second Amendment rights to the narrowest possible box.
 An analogous reading of the First Amendment would be that the State can restrict certain publications on the grounds that they might impact public safety. For example, that violent video games could be banned. The Supreme Court has rejected that argument for the First Amendment.

The upshot is that California can impose restrictions on "Acceptable Handgun Characteristics"; some of which may make it more difficult for handgun manufacturer to keep handgun prices affordable; others which may be technologically unfeasible, and finally most or all of these new regulations may require mandatory registration (in case nobody noticed the nuances of the legislation).

 Here is the summation of the opinion of the court, From Pena v. Lindley:
California requires that new models of handguns meet certain criteria, and be listed on a handgun roster, before they may be offered for sale in the state. Two provisions require that a handgun have a chamber load indicator and a magazine detachment mechanism, both of which are designed to limit accidental firearm discharges. The third provision, adopted to aid law enforcement, requires new handguns to stamp microscopically the handgun’s make, model, and serial number onto each fired shell casing. Plaintiffs asserted that these three provisions have narrowed their ability to buy firearms in California, in violation of the Second Amendment, and that the handgun roster scheme imposes irrational exceptions, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Note that some of the provisions eliminate category your standard 1911 frame; others (microstamping) require technology which has not yet proven feasible by current production technology.

Two Comments:
(1) it's convenient, as a state, to be able to require technical tweaks which are not yet possible for the manufacturers to conform if you want to make it more cumbersome (impossible) to own a new firearm:
(2) I'm glad I don't live in California

Well, why SHOULDN'T we treat Gun Violence as an "Epidemic"?

Many people (most often physicians) are suggesting that we can stop "Gun Violence" by treating it as an epidemic. here's just one example:

Can we stop the gun violence epidemic? Yes, by treating it as a health crisis | TheHill:
After each new episode in our nation’s worsening gun violence epidemic, the same two things happen: First, our screens and social media feeds are saturated with hauntingly familiar images — and then we’re told that it’s too soon to talk about gun laws. We need to break this cycle.
Obviously, this physician has decided that he's tired of seeing shooting victims in the Emergency room, and his solution is to "... talk about gun laws ...".    We can't blame him for wanting to grasp at straws.  But we can blame him for only seeing the obvious.

Let's talk about "gun laws".

We have thousands of  laws restricting access to guns, and yet the "Gun Violence Epidemic" continues.   By now, most rational people who can stand apart from their preconceptions will have accepted that if "gun laws" are the solution to gun violence ... they aren't working.  Which is curious, because we have more laws (national, regional, local, etc.) restricting access to guns than any other physical object.

This, in spite of the Second amendment which mandates that access to guns "... shall not be infringed"!

But this physician is suggesting the the "epidemic" of gun violence can be resolved by simply imposing more gun laws, which will not be obeyed by criminals..

So instead of talking about "gun violence", shouldn't we be talking about "criminals"?

Oh.   That's too hard. Therefore Physicians (and Politicians, and a lot of other groups) would rather talk about LAWS than to seek a true solution.

If we're to talk about "Gun Violence" as a National problem which must resolved, we should look at the cause of Gun Violence.

It isn't the ready availability of guns; millions of law- abiding Americans own guns and have never broken a law.  Where necessary in their home area, if guns must be registered they dutifully register their guns.    If certain kinds of guns are forbidden by law, they don't own those guns (except under special license ... still legally).

Summation:The problem with "Gun violence" isn't GUNS, it's VIOLENCE.

And we cannot resolve the problem of VIOLENCE by restricting access to guns; because that isn't working!

What's the solution?

This Gun Violence Thing isn't a legal problem, it's a societal problem. (Preaching to the choir much?)

Cities need to clean up their slums, provide jobs and support for their citizens who are floundering.
States need to keep track of  unemployment figures, and welfare figures, and unwed-mothers who need help to raise their children in a fatherless home where the only authority figure is a mom who has to work so many hours a day that the older children are responsible for raising their younger siblings.

You Can Help:
Examine the budgets for your municipality, county, state .. see how much each contributes to crime prevention, and welfare.   Compare that with the dollars spent on creating new industry, jobs.  Perhaps they can spend more on those areas (eg: tax breaks for companies who hire "at risk" citizens) compared to what they spend on crime prevention (police, prisons etc.).  You may find that your tax dollars are better spent on social programs than on prevention programs.

Talk to your representatives.  They won't lift a finger on an issue that isn't a "hot button", such as Crime and Gun Control.

You may just find that they occasionally listen to their constituents.

Saturday, August 11, 2018

Society's Child

Politicians want to solve "The Gun Problem" by penalizing legal firearms owners; but these are not the people who are are using firearms to commit crime.  The people who intend to break the law ... and eventually do the crime ... are often juveniles or adolescents who have no recourse but criminal activities to feed themselves and their families.

They have no job skills.  They have no future.  The only thing they know that they are GOOD at, is crime.

So that's what they do.

They rob, they steal, they take away from others who have money; because those people have a good job and lots of money, so they won't miss the little that is in their pocked when they are mugged, assaulted, attacked.  Violence is often necessary to establish dominance of the "robber" over the "target".

The victims are usually the robber, not the muggee; although that is not obvious to the person who gets his pocket picked and his face bashed in during the process.

But Politicians promise faithfully every election year to "clean up the neighborhood", and "Stop Crime!".

For the zillionth time ... politicians cannot reduce crime by penalizing the underdog.  They can only do so by recognizing, addressing, and solving the societal problems which lead young men to a life of crime.

If the politicians would find/create jobs, grow the economy, make crime a less attractive alternative than being able to support self and family through social programs which bring pride to a young man and a living wage for his family ..... who wouldn't vote for them?

But the (PTUI!)  politicians all want to be "Crime-Fighters".   And they can't be crime-fighters if there is no crime.  So they choose the easy way, by passing laws which don't help anyone but DO make it harder to be a "young man trying to find his way in a complicated world".

King County Gun Safety Action Plan

Seattle, Washington (located in King County, Washington)  has floated an "Gun Safety Action Plan" which promises to undermine the ability of firearms owners to defend their family, themselves, and their property.    The "County Council" has also suggested that the State Legislature allow municipalities to over-ride state limitations on ban on confiscating firearms.  (See below)

What this means is ... yes, they DO want to "take your guns away from you"; it's an open door to confiscation of private property and an imposition on the right to sell or transfer private property.

This isn't a "Safety Action Plan".  It's a blatant attempt to deprive the citizens of King County of their Second Amendment rights.
King County Gun Safety Action Plan: King County Council Chair Joe McDermott introduced the Gun Safety Action Plan, a King County initiative to protect our residents from gun violence. He also called on the Washington State Legislature to lead or lift the ban imposed on local jurisdictions prohibiting local governments from enacting laws that might limit the sale or possession of firearms in Washington State.

Friday, August 10, 2018

When the guns come out

Worth the read.   American Shooting Journal dot com

Gunfights that Changed LE Tactics: The following are compilation of Police Mag interviews with LEO trainers, firearms experts, and tactical instructors to assess the lasting impacts of these events on patrol officers. As noted by Massad Ayoob, former director of Lethal Force Institute, in addition to horrific circumstances, these incidents contain plenty of bravery by law enforcement officers. “One thing you take from all of these is the tremendous courage of cops fighting against the odds, for their brothers and for the public they serve,” Ayoob says. “It’s inspiring.”

Michigan State student steals identities to buy weapons parts,...

I'm not sure about the question of "full-automatic weapons", but I'm certain that identity theft is not the best way to support your political agenda:
Michigan State student steals identities to buy weapons parts,...: EAST LANSING, Mich. - A Michigan State engineering student is heading to prison after officials said he became an identity thief to buy weapons parts and create illegal machine guns.
However, we are assured of his devotion to the truth when he vows to go straignt:
Elliott said he will never touch a gun or steal from anyone ever again.

Thursday, August 09, 2018

Stop Digging!

When you find yourself in a hole, and you don't know what to do, the first thing is to STOP DIGGING!

Unfortunately, the good citizens of Chicago seem to be "unclear on the concept".  They've been electing Democrats to leadership positions for so long, they apparently aren't aware of that their ballots have both a right and a left side ... they just automatically put a checkmark on the Left side. One wonders if they are even aware of the names by the box ... let alone the history of malfeasance and chicanery of the Leftist candidates.

(Or perhaps that is a prerequisite for appearing on the ballot?)

I'm not a Chicagoan,  so perhaps I am just ignorant of their thought process, but many of us who are casual observers of the workings of Bizzaro-Land  sit by in casual wonder of a people who seemingly delight in electing the most malignant politicians to represent their city, their county, and their state.

Here's the most recent news from Bizzaro-Land:

IDIOCY: Out of ideas, Chicagoland Mayor Emanuel BEGS violent gangs to cut out all the murder and mayhem:
After yet another highly publicized and very deadly weekend in Chicago, Mayor Rahm Emanual has come up with a plan to finally address the rising gang-related violence. Sort of. He’s essentially asking gangs to cut it out.
That's what I call "Leadership"!

Oh ... sorry, I lost my mind for a minute.  That's actually what I call ... um .. INANE?

Think of the most simple-minded soap opera on television, and double it.  That's the best view from afar that you can imagine of the historic Democratic leadership of Illinois in general, and Chicago specifically.   Are you people all suicidal?  You actually vote for these people?

Are you all on The Dole, and do Democrats decide who gets their welfare checks depending on how they voted last year?

I don't mean to be critical of Chicagoans, but .... gee, it's hard not to.  You keep voting the same crooks, idiots and Democrats (sorry to demean crooks and idiots by conflating them with Democrats) into leadership offices, and apparently nobody cares that their elected leaders are sucking on the public teat and you don't even get what's left when they're through.

And they are never through'   they just keep on sucking, and you keep on voting for them!

I probably won't actually PUBLISH this article; it's mean, and dismissive of people in Chicago, and if I lived there I would be very offended.  So I apologize for even writing it.

Still .. have you no pride?

Mistakes were made; people died! Now, it's time to blame the innocent

The 2017 Texas Church shooting was a tragedy which shouldn't have happened.  There were people who knew (cough the United States Air Force cough) that the maniacal attacker should never have been allowed to purchase a firearm, but someone dropped the ball. 

And people died.

IN THE SEARCH for someone to blame (someone who was not dead, and so they could be sued), a Texas couple have chosen the sporting goods store who sold the gunman the firearm used in the shooting.
Academy sporting goods chain sued by couple wounded in Sutherland Springs church shooting | Courts | Dallas News: AUSTIN — A Texas couple who survived the Sutherland Springs church massacre last year have sued the sporting goods store that sold the gunman the firearm used in the shooting.
It's difficult to adequately assign the blame for the acts of a madman, but there's always someone who is willing to accept the challenge.   Usually, the target is someone with "Big Pockets", and so the survivors have chosen to attack the sporting goods store which sold the gun to a man whose record was crystal clear.

His record should not have been so transparent; his employer (United States Air Force) declined to report him as a "domestic abuser", so his application to purchase a firearm was not challenged.
But it's very difficult (and expensive!) to bring suit against an arm of the Federal Government ... but shouldn't the victims, and their families, have SOMEONE to blame?    So the survivors chose the least responsible, but most vulnerable, corporate identity in the BIZARRE chain of events: They sued the store that sold the gun to the man who shot the innocents even though his employer  (the Federal Government) knew he was irresponsible ... a "Domestic Abuser".

The store was not irresponsible; they followed the rules, and the rules required that they perform a background check.  They did that.  They found no reason to deny the purchase, on the federal database of "Bad Guys/No Fly List/Whatever!":

The problem was; nobody who was responsible survived!

Still, the survivors had a right to sue for damages (something about "denial of filial relationship", etc; .. I'm not a lawyer)   But they knew they could never be able to fund a suit against the Federal Government of the U.S. Air Force. 

So they sued the store who (entirely legally) sold the gun.   I don't blame them.  Someone had to pay.  The problem is ... nobody who was responsible

You can write the rest of the story.   You've read it all before. Plaintiff loses the case and is fined court costs plus legal fees.

NOBODY wins in this tragedy.

Wednesday, August 08, 2018

VPC claims hundreds killed by Licensed Concealed Carriers

The Violence Policy Center (an anti-gun group who has no dog in this fight at ALL and therefore has no reason to cook the statistics) claims* that owners of Concealed Handgun Licenses are "responsible" for hundreds of deaths "... not involving self defense...".

One needs to read carefully when evaluating claims from this source.

Since the article doesn't provide links to the "websites" which 'offer details', it's impossible to confirm or refute their claims.

As for their assertion that these killings were "not involving self defense", one wonders how many deaths were deemed necessary due to defense against other violent crimes, or in defense of other persons (including family).   Nor does the article provide information about whether the shooters were charged with a felony ... let alone tried, or convicted. 

Are they lazy?  Do they have any facts to support their message?   Or are they just liars?

Blanket Charges such as this are typical of VPC screeds.   Unsubstantiated by reputable third parties, their so-called statistics meet the lowest level of believability; "if they say so, it must be true".

I call this innuendo; an obvious distortion of facts offered to convince the already convinced anti-gun crowd which has declared it's intention to delete your 2nd Amendment rights from the Constitution.

As a counter to their charges, read the Pew Poll recently posted from Ammoland.

(It is telling, to compare the sourced claims of Pro-Second Amendment websites to the unsourced  claims of the anti-gunner websites.)

* In case  VPC deletes their egregious statement from their website, the link and full text is printed under the fold.

Tuesday, August 07, 2018

Goblin Count

Col. Jeff Cooper, writing a regular column in a popular gun magazine (I believe it was "Guns and Ammo"),  published a running count of the number of felons who were taken down during the attempted commission of violent crime.   The defenders were armed private citizens.

(Cooper's column was titled "Cooper's Corner".)

He called each successful defense an increase of the "Goblin Count" ... the Goblins being the bad guys, the count was the death of the goblin.

Cooper is gone now, but Goblins are a self-renewing resource.    Here's the latest incident:

Police: Armed bystander takes down gunman at Titusville back-to-school event | WFTV:  August 7, 2018   TITUSVILLE, Fla. - An armed bystander shot a man who opened fired on a back-to-school event at a Titusville park after a fistfight, police said.  The shooting occurred at Isaac Campbell Park on South Street shortly after 5:20 p.m. when the shooter, whom police have not identified, returned to the park after a fistfight and began firing, investigators said. 

The Colonel would certainly counted that engagement as "Goblin: 0, Good Guy 1"

Sunday, August 05, 2018

California has officially become a "NICHE" market for Firearms Manufacturers

California's new "Bullet-Stamping" law serves no useful crime-solving purpose, because it's prohibitively expensive and ineffective even if it were technically and economically feasible.  Which, as of this date, it is not. It only serves the Leftist agenda of making it more difficult and expensive for law-abiding citizens of that state to purchase  new semi-automatic handguns.

Wednesday, August 01, 2018

Proposed Gun Laws are Unconstitutional: "Automatic Weapon"

A lot of  the new "proposed" gun laws make no sense. 

Okay, I take that back; most of them are so nuanced that (when you parse them) they make no sense.

Take the issue of the term: "Semi-automatic weapon".

According to many sources, that defines a firearm which will fire one shot with every pull of the trigger.

Imbeciles of the World, Unite!

I may or may not own a double-action revolver.
 It will fire one shot with every pull of the trigger.

According to the lame-ass definitions provided by imbeciles who know nothing about firearms, that should be considered a "Semi-automatic firearm", and subject to draconian restrictions.   But it's a Revolver, and not easy to reload, so they ignore this inconvenient fact item.

There are definitions on the internet which attempt to address this conundrum:
semi-automatic firearm, or self-loading firearm, is one that not only fires a bullet each time the trigger is pulled, but also performs all steps necessary to prepare it to discharge again—assuming cartridges remain in the firearm's feed device. Typically, this includes extracting and ejecting the spent cartridge case from the firing chamber, re-cocking the firing mechanism, and loading a new cartridge into the firing chamber. To fire again, the trigger is released and re-pressed.

Well, what if you don't have to physically extract the "spent cartridge case", and what if the action of "recocking the firing mechanism and loading a new cartridge in the firing chamber" is accomplished by merely pulling the trigger again?   How is this different?

A better, and more accurate definition of "semi-automatic"  might be that you fire a shot each time the trigger is pulled until you run out of ammunition or discontinue pulling the trigger.   That presupposes that you don't have to perform any manual action other than pulling the trigger again to fire the next shot.

Well, then you have just defined a double-action revolver .. against which the cognoscenti have no defense.  Their definition requires that the gun "automatically" load the next round, instead of the user doing so "automatically"  upon pulling the trigger again.   (Petty bastards)

But gun-grabbers are all about restricting Second Amendment rights of people who use pistols ... rather than revolvers .. to perform the same function: pull the trigger to fire the next shot until the ammunition supply is exhausted.  They're good with that.   They are comfortable in their ignorance, believing that nobody can run a revolver and reload it as quickly as they (personally) might be expected to run a semi-automatic pistols, reloading from magazines.

I have just two things to say:

Jerry Miculek

Tuesday, July 31, 2018

Money for nothin'; Chicks for Free!

"... Anyone who wants to vote ... " Really, Michelle?

Michelle Obama joins nationwide voter registration effort | News |
(July 20, 2018)
Stepping back into the political fray, Michelle Obama is lending her star power to a new nationwide effort to register anyone who wants to vote in the November midterm elections. The former first lady this week announced her involvement as a co-chair of When We All Vote. The nonpartisan, not-for-profit organization will work online and in person to help register anyone who wants to vote in the fall, when Democrats hope to ride a wave of anger among liberal voters against President Donald Trump's policies on immigration, health care and other issues to take back control of the House and Senate.

Usually, we expect that voters are at least American citizens.

Michelle Obama carefully avoided the issue; she said "ANYONE" and we can only assume that she meant what she said.

Apparently, this is not an issue for Democrats.  And Ms Obama has not established a qualification which includes American Citizenship.

She said: "ANYONE WHO WANTS TO VOTE"; and I take her at her word' which assumes that the vote will become available to anyone who is a resident ... not just those who are citizens.

We now have millions of non-citizens in this country.  Some of them are working and some of them are living on "The Dole".  There's something wrong with this, and non-citizens should not vote.

Those who can, do; those who cannot, teach

For the past eight years, I have been the instructor at my local club in a program of "Introduction to USPSA".  It was an opportunity to introduce new shooters to USPSA competition (which I have been active in since 1983), and gave me something to look forward to in every month.

I kept telling myself that I was donating my time as a way of "giving back to the sport".   In truth, since my eyesight has degraded over the years, it was a way of keeping my hand in it, since I was no longer able to see well enough to be competitive.

But last month, I slept through the beginning of my class.  I had to phone the range and tell them that I was unable to attend.

That was a personal disappointment to me, not only because I had several students who wondered where I was, but because it was one of the best parts of my month.   And I slept through it!

The club thought I was "giving back to the sport";  while I enjoyed meeting new shooters and sharing the insights of rules of safety which I had learned over 30+ years of Competition. I had an intrinsic interest in teaching new shooters how to be safe.  It was the best part of my month, and I always looked forward to it.

AS a consequence, I announced to my home club that I was retiring.  Because I was unable to even show up for a scheduled class, it was obvious that I was no longer competent and they should no longer schedule the class.  (I hope they found someone else to take over the class, but I haven't heard from them on that issue..)

It's disappointing to give up one of the few activities which allow me time on the range.   And it was embarrassing to read the emails from the scheduled attendees who asked me "WTF?"

But when it's time to retire ... you know it.  And I knew it.

The gun club was very understanding, and they even provided me an honorarium in the form of a gift card from WalMart.   I hadn't expected that, but it was touching to learn that they appreciated my small contribution to gun-safety at USPSA matches there.

I don't think anyone realized that I had donated eight years of once-a-month class instruction because it was the only way I could enjoy the sport in which I had participated for so many decades.  (In truth, while I was still able to compete, I wanted to ensure that the people  I was competing against had the best instruction on rules and safety ... but it it eventually became more important that I got to meet New Shooters, and none of them ever disappointed me by being an unsafe shooter!)

I'll miss the class, and the opportunity to meet new shooters.   But when your time is through, it's better to gracefully yield to the inevitable, than to fight against it.

It's all about safety, after all.

Sunday, July 29, 2018

Tanks For The Memories

Arnold Schwarzenegger Demolishes Stretch Limousine With 50-Ton Tank | Daily Wire:
 He might be 70 years old, but Arnold Schwarzenegger is still a total bada**. The Terminator appeared last week on "Jay Leno's Garage," but instead of showing off a vintage car, Arnie was there with his 1951 M-47 Patton tank.
Nah, I'm not going to embed the video.   Go to the article on Daily Wire; they need the traffic.

Friday, July 27, 2018

You might be a Gun Nut. (Huge list) – Gun Free Zone

You might be a Gun Nut. (Huge list) – Gun Free Zone:
If your answer to the recent rec.guns newsgroup thread, “How many guns do you need?” is, “How many do you have room for in your house?” you just might be a gun nut.
I recently found a link to this 2010 mega-list of  "Gun Nut" characteristics.

It's fun, it's funny, and there's too much truth in it to be denied.

Actually, I remember reading this when it was published ... I was working then, and I spent an entire lunch hour at my desk reading it.   My co-workers asked me what I found so amusing, so I sent them all links to it.

Lunch our was over-extended; we all had to put in some unpaid overtime that evening.

Go, read.  Enjoy.   And thank the Gun Free Zone.

Gun Violence in Peaceful Canada? Impossible!

Hard to believe that Canadians, who have often been dismissive of America's "Culture of Gun Violence", are finally admitting that they have their own share of crazed mass murderers.
Toronto City Council Urges Ban on Handgun, Ammunition Sales After Shooting:
On July 22, 2018, Faisal Hussain opened fire in Toronto’s Greektown, killing two and wounding 13. CBS News reported that Toronto Mayor John Tory reacted to the shooting by saying, “Guns are too readily available to too many people.” The National Post quoted Tory saying, “Why does anyone in this city need to have a gun at all? ....”

Eventually our Northern Neighbors will acknowledge that all nations need to address the problem of rising gun violence.   And banning guns and ammunition will only disarm the honest public, and turn their citizens into sheep at the mercy of the wild dogs.

Hard to believe that a nice Irish lad like Faisal would go rogue, isn't it?

(NOTE: Bearing Arms reports that the firearm was obtained illegally.   No great surprise.)


I mentioned "a nice Irish lad" ... then I read the current news.  It seems that the Irish (bless the ancestral home of my "DILDINE" ancestors) are still causing mischief:

July 27, 2018Justice And you thought the Criminal Justice System in the USA was screwed up. 
Violent burglar dressed up as garda during raid on family.
It seems things aren’t much different in Ireland.
He has 130 previous convictions for burglary, theft, road traffic offences, criminal damage, possession of drugs, taking vehicles and public order matters.
If he was sentenced to 6-months for each of those 130 offenses, he wouldn’t be out causing more mayhem. But the Irish, like their European neighbors, are too civilized to actually put people in prison.

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime

Where does it say in the U.S. Constitution that if you get away with a crime for 20 years, you don't have to pay the price?
Trump voter says she is 'ashamed' to be an American after daughter-in-law is deported: report | TheHill
Missouri woman who voted for President Trump now says she is “ashamed” to be an American after her daughter-in-law, a Mexican immigrant who had been in the U.S. for nearly 20 years, was deported.
So ... if you get away with breaking the law for "long enough", that makes it  okay?  Is that the story?
 Shirley Stegall told the Associated Press that while she supported Trump’s campaign promises to deport more criminal immigrants, she did not think her son’s wife, Letty, fell into that category.
You were not aware that your daughter-in-law was an illegal immigrant, after 20 years? 
And you support "TRUMP:", as long as his laws don't affect you personally?
 “I’ve always been proud to be an American,” Stegall said. “But now I’m ashamed.” Letty Stegall came illegally to the U.S. in 1999 and was living with her husband, Shirley's son, and a 17-year-old daughter from an earlier marriage.
Shirley thought that America was "Okay" as long as the laws didn't affect your family.
That's ... interesting, considering your daughter in law is a drunken driver. But that's another story.
 Letty Stegall was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in February, six years after a misdemeanor drunken driving charge, for which she spent a month in jail, alerted authorities to her undocumented status.
So your daughter-in-law is an out-of-control drunken driver, a threat to her neighbors, and you think that's not just cause to expel her?

But that's not the point:

The road to American Citizenship by marriage is clearly defined by law.

(It took me 30 seconds to find the applicable law)

If you marry a U.S, citizen, you won’t be eligible for U.S. citizenship right away. But you may become eligible for a U.S. green card, which can lead to U.S. citizenship.
However, there are certain requirements that must be met before you can apply for a green card and ultimately for U.S. citizenship after marriage to a U.S. citizen.

Apparently, nobody in the family assumed the responsibility to research the law.

Here is the point:

The mother-in-law is "Ashamed" to be an American, because nobody cared enough to research the law on Immigrants who marry American Citizens.

It's not what you don't know that leads to "problems"; it's what you don't know, but think you know.

So .. lady, you can be ashamed to be An American, but it's not because America done you wrong.

You should be ashamed to be An American because you just assumed something that isn't true!

Oh, and by the way?  Claiming that you support TRUMP will buy you a cup of coffee, if you have a buck to pay for the actual .... you know ... cup of coffee.

Thursday, July 26, 2018

Teapot ... meet Tempest

If someone buys a soft drink in California and requests/receives a straw, and later sells the "Like New Straw Only Used Only One Time!" to a third party via the internet ... is that a Straw Purchase?

Borepatch: Criminalizing Soda Straws:
There is a proposed bill in the California House that would make it a crime to give a restaurant patron a straw unless the patron specifically requests one. Each instance would be punishable by 6 months in jail and a $1,000 fine. Leaving aside the costs associated with incarceration and the availability of jail space for the offending wait staff, The larger issue is the ongoing criminalization of activities performed by non-criminals regular people everyone.
There are more "Second Amendment" allegories in here, but I've used my Bad Pun quota already.

Readers are invited to contribute.

Wednesday, July 25, 2018

Public Service Announcement: Heroin Epidemic. Pass it on

"If it saves just one life ..."

Read this:

The Heroin Epidemic, Narcan, and First Aid for Opioid Overdoses | Active Response Training:
Last Thursday at work I saved a heroin overdose patient’s life by giving her Narcan.
I don't think I know anyone who is using drugs which have fatal consequences, but you never know.

I'm not sure what you will do with this information, but it's better to know than not to know.

Doctor Doctor, Tell Me The News ...

Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership (DRGO) frequently publish articles describing the way that anti-gun activists (aka: "Gun Grabbers") warp news reporting to put the blame for gun violence not on criminals and mad men, but on ... well, "responsible gun owners".

Several professionals contribute to this site.

Here, Dr. M.S. Brown provides what may be regarded as satire describing the preferred talking points for anti-gun news articles.  Only the first paragraph is quoted; you are encouraged to "GRTWT" (Go Read The Whole Thing): but since this was published 2 years ago, I suppose I will have to do an internet search to find the implied "Part 2". 
Or you will.

Here's a teaser:

The 2016 Journalist’s Guide to Gun Violence Coverage–Part 1 – Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership:
Guns are a sad fact of life in American culture and are a major topic in modern journalism. As a Journalist, you have a duty to get involved and make a difference in this important societal debate. By following certain guidelines, the concerned Journalist can be assured of having the maximum impact on this shameful American problem. The concepts discussed here apply both to broadcast and print media. For the purposes of this Guide, our work is divided between routine stories about gun violence and the broader coverage of the political debate about gun control. They are both equally important. Let us first address the proper way to construct a news story involving common gun crimes.
I can't wait for Part II to be published! 

And by the way in case you didn't notice .. the Good Doctors use satire to emphasize their pro-Second Amendment political position.   
So if you go to the original article and start ranting ...  you may embarrass yourself.

Monday, July 23, 2018

What the hell is:Free Trade"? And why can't I buy a gun in another state?

Interstate commerce regulations started out to regulate shit. States were shipping "solid waste" to other states whose regulations were more "lenient". Congress got involved ... politically adding to the burden of  "wastes".

Eventually, it was permitted to ship "wastes" between states (for disposal) without much regulation.

Now that decision is being applied to the question whether states have differing regulations concerning the purchase of firearms.   Specifically, can a resident of one state purchase a firearm from another state of which he is not a citizen?

Didn't we resolve this with the Second Amendment?

I guess not.

Interstate handgun purchase ban divides federal court - Interstate handgun purchase ban divides federal court:
A decision not to grant a retrial in a challenge to the federal law barring handgun sales to out-of-state residents sparked intense debate in one of the nation’s federal appeals courts last week. The judges on the U.S. 5th Circuit were divided on overturning a decision by a three-judge panel that supported the gun law earlier this year. They narrowly voted 8-7 against granting a rare en banc hearing by the full circuit. The thin majority agreed that the longtime ban on selling handguns over the counter to out-of-state residents is in the public interest. The minority vehemently disagreed with the concept, which predated today’s modern instant criminal background check process, holding it was against the Second Amendment and was confusing when compared to the ability to sell rifles and shotguns without such prohibitions.
The upshot of this is that the lawyers in Congress consider your Second amendment right to "keep and bear arms" to be of lesser importance than shit.

see below:

End of an Era

For the past eight years, I have been teaching a once-monthly class in "Introduction to USPSA" (United States Practical Shooting Association) at my local gun club.

This month, I resigned from the teaching staff at my club.  I'm in my 70's, my eyesight is failing, the rules of competition have grown exponentially, and I no longer consider myself either physically nor experientialy qualified to teach the course.

USPSA has grown from six divisions to ... I'm not sure how many; but I can't teach a discipline which I have not experienced.   And many of the new shooters are disinterested in the pistol course; they want to compete in "Pistol Caliber Carbines", just to mention one new division.

When I started teaching, the divisions were Limited, Limited 10, Open, Revolver, Production and Single Stack.   All of them were restricted to pistols only.

(I've shot at least one match in all six of these divisions.)

Since then, USPSA has included the divisions of Pistol Caliber Carbine and ... well, I'm pretty sure that by the time this article is published there will be at least 1 more division.   I'll still shoot that PCC match, although I need more practice before I'm comfortable with the ergonomics.  But I'm now resigning myself to the fact that new divisions will soon be added and I can no longer speak authoritatively.

If this sounds as if I'm complaining ... I'm not.

One of the more exciting aspects of this sport is how it has grown exponentially over the past decades.  I shot my first match in 1983, no "divisions", and they were thinking about adding a new division to separate folks who were shooting 1911 frames with 7-round magazines from 1911 frames with 11-round magazines! (Yes, 11 round single-stack magazines were rare and expensive, and unreliable; but when they ran "right" they were an advantage!)

Today, it's more expensive.

The equipment I used in my first match (gun, magazines, ammunition, web-belt, holster, magazine carriers .. all army surplus except for my self-reloaded ammunition) cost LESS than the ammunition, and magazines I used in the last match I shot.

Time flies, when you're having fun.

Saturday, July 21, 2018

"New Machine Gun Will Blast Like Battle Tanks" ... as if!

Yeah, sure.  I've heard this before.  It was bullshit then, it's bullshit now.
Army's new machine gun will blast like battle tanks | Fox News: The Army’s new weapon will look like a light machine gun, but will put M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank-style blasting power literally at the fingertips of U.S. soldiers.
In 1970 Vietnam, while I was on "Profile" for an extreme case of "Bamboo Poisoning", the US ARMY put me on profile (light duty.)

I got a lot of scratches which were infected because they were not treated; it took 5 years for the sores to heal up ... nasty stuff!

While I was on "Profile", in the rear with the gear, the Army decided I was lolling around doing nothing, so they assigned me to the task of testing and evaluating a 'new weapon".

I don't recall the nomenclature, but it was a shoulder-fired, four-round semi-automatic rocket launcher which would launch rockets (essentially the M72 Rocket Launcher) from a "Man-Portable" platform used to disable enemy "armor"..

The "platform" weighed about 50 pounds when loaded, and it required an "assistant gunner" to carry 4-round reloads.  It may not have been the best usage of infantrymen, since the Viet Cong didn't have a lot of tanks

At the end of the test, my evaluation was that the mechanism was too heavy to carry in a combat environment, deprived the army of two infantrymen who were more effective with common shoulder-fired weapons, and served no discernible combat function because the burdoned infantrymen were unable to keep up with an infantry platoon during movement in the field.

Besides which, the rockets seemed unlikely to actually "Bust" a dirt-bermed bunker which was common in NVA fixed positions such as those I had encountered in at least two combat assaults.

(The M72 rocket was a "tank buster", and we never saw an NVA tank during my 1969-1970 tour.)

My sores healed up and I was returned to active duty.  I never saw any response from "higher" to my evaluation .. but the four-round semi-automatic M72 rocket launcher was never issued to troops in the field.   I decided that I had performed my duty by nixing a bad concept.

Going to Nationals!

Musings Over a Barrel: Going to Nationals!:

Were in!  This September, I get to shoot the IDPA National Championship match.

No, that's not me saying that; I'm too old and slow to go to a Nationals match any more (but then, I always was).

But for one young competitor, especially, it's the Dream Come true!

Competition makes Monsters of us all:
You have to qualify for the nationals, which isj't all that hard to do if you're a fast, young gun. 

I remember my first USPSA National match back in the 1980's, when I was shooting C-class in Limited division.

That was in the period when USPSA was just beginning to add new divisions ... as I recall, we had only Open and "Stock" at the time; "Limited" division wasn't even envisioned, let alone all the divisions we contend with today.

   I was having the hell kicked out of me by a young man whose skill-level in his (STOCK?) category was WAY beyond his rating.  I couldn't believe he was still C-class, so I searched him on the internet.  It turned out that he had recently been bumped up to B-class.  He wasn't aware of it, but I brought it to the attention of the match staff, and in doing so was bumped up to third place in my class and category.

I'm not proud of it,  I've never been "skilled" in competition pistol shooting, but I was at the peak of m form after spending months shooting thousands of rounds a month to be as competitive as I could, and I really wanted to win SOMETHING for the $400+ match fee.

The gentleman in question was disappointed, of course, but he never said a bad word to me.   He was the better man, in more ways than one.

I guess this is something of a cautionary note to competitors.   Sometimes winning isn't as important as playing the game, taking your licks, and shaking the hand of those who beat you.

I've become something of an expert at congratulating better shooters..

I only wish I had learned that lesson 20 years earlier.

Well, and I wish I was a better shooter ... but it's better to play and lose, than not to play at all.

Wednesday, July 18, 2018

NOTICE: This Is An "Anti-government" Website

Late last night (or early this morning ... I'm retired, who cares?) I did some research on my own website and discovered that mine was an "Anti-Government Website".

This is rewarding on at least two issues:

  1. somebody still reads this blog!
  2. somebody noticed that it's an "anti-government" blog!
I think that anyone who isn't at least a little "anti-government" isn't paying attention.  
Or he is a Democrat ... which amounts to about the same thing.  

Here is an example of how "Government" resolves societal problems.

Here's what I think:
If you want to hurt yourself, shoot yourself in the foot.If you want to REALLY hurt yourself, trust your Government.
Federal, state, county, local; it doesn't matter.   When you trust an anonymous group of professional bureaucrats (is there any other kind?)  to "govern" your personal life, you have conceded your fate to the whims of people who couldn't hold down a real job.

So .. yes, I am "Anti-Government" because whores are the only class of people who want to screw you for money AND NOT RUIN YOUR LIFE!   A whore will at least give you the option of wearing a condom;  politicians want to bare-back every time.   And whores are quite honest about what they're doing, and why.   Other than that, there's no easily defined difference between the two career paths.

I'm embarrassed to admit this, but I have actually voted for politicians who I thought were honest.


An Honest Politician is one who, once bought, stays bought.

Tuesday, July 17, 2018

"Justice in Action?" You decide.

Apparently folks in Tallahassee don't have a lot of confidence in the "Support Your Local Sheriff" mantra.

Academy Sports pistol thief - who threatened to kill upon his release - released on bond - The Gun Writer:
Jason F. White told Tallahassee police that he tried to steal a Glock 27 from Academy Sports June 29 because he needed to kill someone. The unemployed 24-year-old Tallahassee resident told officers an “unknown man” was threatening him and his children, and that he needed to kill him.
This certainly provides a provocative contrast to the previous story about the Brit who was arrested for attempted murder for firing a paint-ball gun into the ground in front of an aggressor.

Attempted Murder Criteria in England

"I'm going to take your farm!"

British farmer fires paintball gun into ground to warn off aggressive trespasser.
“Close enough. I felt he would lunge at me and strike me with the stick as he was carrying it in a raised position,” the owner said. “He ignored my demand, slowly moving forward. Consciously, I moved the paintball gun to the front, still maintaining its position pointing to the ground. Approximately one metre in front of me, I released two paintballs. They made a popping sound. Then the man stopped.” The owner then called the police.
Arrested for attempted murder!

... and people wonder why eighteenth century Americans revolted against British Rule!

(It's a good thing we did, else we too would be a bunch of wimps with no rights!)

No, I am not making this up.  From the original article:

Charges could include possession of a dangerous weapon, contravening the Dangerous Weapons Act and even a charge as serious as pointing of a firearm – if the victim believes that the weapon is a real firearm. However, the Act states in section 3(1) that “any person who is in possession of a dangerous weapon under circumstances which may raise a reasonable suspicion that the person intends to use the dangerous weapon for an unlawful purpose, is guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding three years”.

IS IT SIGNIFICANT that the article does not mention whether charges were brought against the tresspasser?

I think so.  What do you think?

Voter Qualification in The Land of Fruits and Nuts ... and yes, even People from Outer Space!

You don't need to be an Earthling to vote in San Francisco.
San Francisco Department of Elections issues voter registration forms for non-citizens | Monday, July 16, 2018 05:42PM SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- Monday the Department of Elections Issued Voter Registration Forms for non-citizens who are eligible to vote for members of the San Francisco Board of Education in the November 6th 2018 election. The measure passed in 2016 with a close vote of 54 percent to 46 percent following two failed previous attempts.
Well, that explains how the people that California has elected its governor.

Sunday, July 15, 2018

The FBI is FINALLY updating significant records to NICS

It's not "OUR" fault that people who should not own guns have not reliably been caught during Instant Background Checks.

The Infinite Wisdom of the American public has often pointed their fingers at legitimate firearms owners for "Mass Shootings" over the years; but recent information suggests that governmental agencies who are responsibility for updating  the list of forbidden firearms purchasers have not been doing the job; the embedded article points right back to them.

"THEM" .. is the folks responsible for religiously maintaining current information on the Database which registers and tracks felons and madmen.

Report: FBI will add 400 million new records to NICS:
The Federal Bureau of Investigation will add more than 400 million new records to the database used to vet gun buyers, according to a report this week from the Trace. The National Data Exchange, aka N-DEx, contains incident and arrest reports, probation and parole documents, according to the report — a trove of information capable of preventing questionable gun transfers from proceeding, such as in the case of the Charleston church shooter.

Seller Beware!

"They Say" ... it's easier to buy a gun than to buy a used car.

That only goes to show what they know.

Massachusetts man arrested for selling guns without a license:
Rathsomnang Neth, 22, faces one count of dealing in firearms without a license and two counts of possessing and transferring an unregistered shotgun with a shortened barrel, according to a federal indictment unsealed Wednesday. The former carries a maximum sentence of five years and a $250,000 fine. Each latter possession charge, however, carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, according to the Department of Justice.
Who among the readers doesn't have some firearms which are 'superfluous to my needs' and would you like to find them a new home?

Sellers who dispose of more than X-number of firearms in private transactions, during Y-number of months, would be advised to go beyond the usual cautions of vetting their buyers.

If you don't know the values of "X" and "Y", maybe you should just hide them in your gun safe.  Or gift them to a a family member.

It doesn't matter who you sell to, their soon (who knows when) comes a point when you are arbitrarily migrated from the position of "private owner" to "DEALER!!!"
If you sell "too many guns" in "too short a time", you are still subject to FEDERAL prosecution regulation.

My case is a lot easier.  I'm old, I'll die soon.  My kids will inherit my firearms as well as my furniture.

They can sell my furniture to anybody .. but they need to go through an arcane number of federal regulations to successfully "vend" firearms.

Somehow this makes my prospects of an early heart attack less threatening, considering that the legal implications are A Fate Worse Than Death!

So .. yes; I believe I WILL have another piece of pie, thank you very much.

God Forbid I should have to face a jury of my peers.

California DOJ BLINKS!

This is our "Once a Year Day"!

California yields to the simple logic that what they require is incapable of enforcement.
California DOJ Withdraws Regulation Requiring Registration of ‘Assault Weapons’ | The Daily Caller: The California Department of Justice withdrew a regulation Wednesday evening requiring California firearm owners to register so-called “assault weapons” following a lawsuit filed by a group of gun rights advocacy organizations
California politicians have established a "need" for an exceedingly complicated and expensive legal path toward compliance.   Except they have not the laws to enforce the law.   Which makes the entire exercise merely an amateurish attempt to frighten legal gun-owners by the imposition of penalties which do not exist in law.

As usual, the Liberal Gun-Grabbers had not the foresight to do their homework. 
(As teenagers, did their mothers make them do their homework before watching television?   Apparently, not!   That's once more difference between the Common People and The Anointed.)

Thursday, July 12, 2018

how do you handle a problem like Maria?

Both Liberals and Conservatives seem unable to agree on the primary "problem" with Judge Kavenaugh.

Do the Liberals hate/fear him because he is "Pro-Life", or because he is "Pro-Gun"?

The answer from the Liberal side seems to be:   "YES!"

‘Battle Stations,’ Says Gun Rights Leader about Kavanaugh Nomination - Liberty Park Press: Schumer and others are bracing for battle to keep Kavanaugh off the high court. Their main focus initially appears to be fear about a reversal of Roe v. Wade, but those who attended a protest on the steps of the Supreme Court Monday night are all perennial anti-gunners. 

Native Oregonians are all about Constitutional Rights.

We fear that a Liberal judge will value non-natives over the rights of those of us who were born here, who went to war from here, and who have contributed to the treasury through our taxes for decades.

Tuesday, July 10, 2018

Never Sign A Petition Until You Know What It Calls For!

The author of this article points out that signers of the anti-second amendment petition being circulated in Washington were unable to understand what they were signing.

Professional Consultants screw-up Anti-Gun initiative effort with amateur failure to proofread | We the Governed:
Washington State’s much hyped anti-gun initiative (I-1639) looks like it could be aborted before it can even make the ballot.  The Initiative Sponsors and their consultants failed to proof-read the initiative language they printed on the back of the signature sheets. It turns out they didn’t use the accurate language of the very initiative they were sponsoring.  They can’t blame gun owners, the NRA, Trump, Republicans, or even the Washington Secretary of State for this screw up.  Their consultants own this failure.
Note that the typeface on the "explanation" (required on the back of every petition signature page) was so small that it was not 'easily readable" ... among other violations of the standards for petition forms.

Friday, July 06, 2018

Independence Day Blues ... Second Draft ... The Real Story

In the aftermath of Independence Day, my thoughts often veer toward a consideration of my role during the war in Viet Nam.

I was drafted, and that was no excuse.  I could have migrated to Canada, I could have refused to serve, I could have opted for a non-military role ... oh, no!  I couldn't.   I decided to serve my country, comforted by the  arrogance that I was competent to lead men into battle.

I went where I was told, did what I was told, and the world is a better place because I did my duty as an American.

Well ... perhaps not.  Allow me to tell the story of my failure to lead and to protect the men who bravely accepted my leadership and died as a result of it.

US v MILLER in coments

Why the AR15 Shouldn’t Be Banned - Omaha Outdoors

This is an interesting 2nd Amendment-challenging article in itself, but in the comments someone brought up the question of "US v MILLER":

@mrsatyre "private ownership is, and has been proven in court time and time again, unrelated to militias"
Not exactly. DC v. Heller (2008): "The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
But then, US v. Miller (1939):

I take this opportunity to (once again) discuss the MILLER decision:

Note in passing that US v Miller was lost because the attorney assigned to defend Miller failed to attend the hearing ... Miller was lost by default, not because the original argument was specious.

DETAILS: Miller, a bootlegger, had a shotgun to defend himself and his still. When his still was raided and T-men found that Miller had used a sawed-off shotgun to defend it,

Miller decided that the game wasn't worth the ante, and disencumbered himself of the still, the firearm and his lawyers.

His lawyers, no longer having a client and thus no fiduciary interest in the case, declined to attend subsequent hearing(s).

The Federal government, finding itself with an 'easy win', filed for closure.

The judge(s) had only one side of the case upon which to base their decision. Thus the Judicialannouncement:
"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has **some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia ..."
(All Emphasis Added! The basis of the judgement was that the defense offered no defense!)

In order to assign the appropriate weight to that decision, I ask you to consider that the defense would have/should have been that the type of firearm used by Miller (a shotgun, if I recall correctly) was inaccurately described by the winning attorney as "not a firearm which had been historically used by the military" or words to that effect)

Any defense attorney in the country could have ... SHOULD HAVE ... pointed at the "Trench Gun" (used by American soldiers during World War 1); which was a 12-gauge shotgun.

But nobody spoke to the 2nd Amendment issue. Nobody cared enough ... except the judges who were left with a Federal case with no defendant ... and they had  recourse except to rule in favor of the only attorneys who appeared to give a damn; the Federal government.

BECAUSE OF THIS COMEDY IN ERRORS we are left with "The Miller Decision" which ignores the 2nd Amendment in favor of a federal prosecutor who was gleefully willing to get a WIN over a bootlegger ... who may, in fact, have been well within his Second Amendment rights to defend his person and his business ... however nefarious both he and his business might be.

The Supreme Court reversed the district court, holding that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual the right to keep and bear a sawed-off double-barrel shotgun. Writing for the unanimous Court, Justice James Clark McReynolds reasoned that because possessing a sawed-off double barrel shotgun does not have a reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, the Second Amendment does not protect the possession of such an instrument.

Thursday, July 05, 2018

Climbing the Stature of Liberty to protest Immigration Policies?

I can't say that I agree with her politics ...
Woman escorted down after scaling Statue of Liberty following anti-ICE protests | Fox News: A woman was escorted down from the Statue of Liberty on Wednesday after she scaled the bottom part of the national monument in protest of U.S. immigration policy, sparking a nearly four-hour standoff with authorities.

But I must admire her  dedication to a cause which is important to her!

Music: "We are climbing Jacob's Ladder (4 minutes)

Wednesday, July 04, 2018


It's the Fourth of July, a day when Americans celebrate their independence.

I won't be celebrating.  The truth is, I dread this day.

"... And the rockets red glare, the bombs bursting in air ...."

That's what I dread.

All that noise, the flame and flare and confusion brings back memories when those bombs were real bombs, or hand grenades, or mortars, or the rat-tat-tag of machine guns.   Outgoing munition, and the guy who always belabors the obvious when he screams INCOMING!!!!

I've done a pretty good job of inuring myself to the sound of gunfire, as I've always been a competitive shooter and a hunter (although the first three years of deer season I had a hard time hitting a deer). 

It's that whole "Bombs Bursting In Air" thing that gets to me.

In Oregon, most fireworks are illegal.   That doesn't bother anybody ... they drive to Washington State and buy hundreds of dollars worth of Screamers and flares and things which make glittery shows of sparklers and smoke and fire.

One, back in the 1980's, I was installing new brakes on my van by the fading light of the sun when my neighbor across the street started exploding firecrackers and rockets and God only knows what all.  I tried to work through it, but the tension increased as my neighbor had a seemingly limitless number of *illegal* fireworks.

I became so agitated, I grabbed the handle of the jack and started across the street; I was mindlessly determined to beat him to a bloody pulp.

I marched down my driveway, and it wasn't until I actually started across the street that I realized I had not grabbed the jack handle, but the pneumatic jack itself.   I realized then the inanity of my reaction, and just went back into my house and had a drink or four.  Or ... lost count.

So now I have a new solution, which I'm trying out this year.  I don't think it will make a difference, but I posted a cardboard sign in my driveway:


It won't matter.   I'll still have trouble sleeping tonight, as the ruckus goes on from dusk to dawn.

But I have already pledged myself to expect to be upset, and not over-react to it.

I use to love Independence Day celebrations.   It was the sound of Liberty.

Now it's the sound of War.  After nearly 50 years, the ghosts still haunt me.

Just this one day a year.   And ... a few nights.

Image result for combat infantry badge

Trip-Wire: Dusk 'til Dawn

The problem with setting up booby-traps in defense of a friendly village is that you must know the daily routine of the "friendly" villagers who use their familiar trails.

This was the quandary that I faced in December of 1969 when I was charged with the mission of intercepting Viet Cong raiders who were suspected of receiving support from a 'friendly village" in my Area of Operations.

There was one main trail .. well used ,.. which was the most advantageous access to villagers whose daily chore it was to work the fields; every morning, they walked the familiar trail  to work their field: out to the fields at dawn, back home at dusk.

Everybody (villagers and Viet Cong) knew we were in the area, and everybody knew that our intention was to intercept VC as they entered the village to receive food, other supplies and intelligence about our counter-VC activities.

And everybody knew the trail that the VC used to enter the village for re-supply; it was the same well-trodden trail that the villagers used to go to their fields to work every damn morning of the year.

I had been putting squad-sized ambushes on that trail for a week, and the members of my squad were on a first-name basis with many of the villagers who walked that trail at dawn on their way to their fields.  Finally I decided that the VC were entering the village just before dawn or dusk, quickly taking their daily supplies, and then exiting the area from the same well-trodden trail.

So every night I placed directional Claymore Mines on the trail, and put scouts overlooking the mines to ensure that they didn't harm villagers on their way to work their fields in the morning,

After a few days, I realized that my assumptions were wrong: the VC were not meeting the villagers on the trail; they were using that same trail to boldly enter the village during the dark hours.  They knew we couldn't reliably monitor the trail 24/7, and were taking advantage of our "down time" to resupply.  And they knew when we set up the Claymores, and avoided those hours.  Or else they merged with the villagers, and we could not discern who was a "local" and who was  VC, so we didn't attack ANYONE!

Yes, we assumed (and rightly) that the villagers were supporting the VC with food and other supplies .. but not arms or ammunition.  I was sure of that.  (Maybe not so sure now ... but nobody got hurt!)

My counter decision was to mine the trail during the dark .. after the villagers had returned to their homes and before they had legitimately entered their fields in the early morning.  My hope was to rely on the villagers to NOT use the trail at night, but for the VC to use the trail to actually enter the village for resupply.

We were not able to position ourselves to watch the trail at night ( it proved impossible to discern movement at night at that time of the year, and the villagers watched our every movement) so I elected to mine the trail with trip-wires attached to Claymore Mines.

It may have been "A Good Idea", except that the mines would destroy ANYONE who walked that trail .. including the villagers who rose at dawn to go to the fields!

Fortunately, it was my habit to take "Last Watch" on every ambush position, and when I saw villagers entering the trail at Dawn I rousted all of my patrol and directed them to help me disarm the mines.

 I had to go "approximately" on the trail (remember, this was semi-dark) where I had set the booby trap ... find the battery which powered the mine(s), and follow the wires to the initiation device.  I disconnected it, and then was safe to remove the trip-wires and the Claymore mine and the battery (and attached wires).

I was accustomed to setting-up battery-powered Claymore mines on a nightly basis.  I examined each individual mine for any booby traps which might have been added by VC (they did that sometimes) and found no problems in de-activating the directional mine.  Then I recovered the wires to the battery and disconnected the battery.  (The VC sometimes booby-trapped our mines, rather than avoiding or removing them; they wanted to kill the Americans who had set the command-detonated mines, so we always examined each Claymore for "enhancements".)


The VietNamese villagers have a .. refined sense of humor; they enjoyed changing their work hour to impose the greatest variation of the time when we needed to be aware of friendly activity; they would rise early, or leave late, so that I was required to rise at the most inconvenient time to remove or de-activate the mines I had placed on their common route of travel to the fields.

It became something of a game, when and by which path they would exit their village to enter their fields. I don't think they were trying to aid the VC in this; they were just playing with the "Amers" and they enjoyed the game.   They knew who was VC and who was not; and I guess they knew that nothing they could do would cause me to endanger them.

At least, that is what I have always hoped.

By the time I DEROSed Viet Nam, I gained a great deal of respect for the folks who spent their lives in a war zone, and the way they dealty with it.  Both US troops and VC/NVA were trying to "Win the Hearts and Minds of the Viet Namese People.  I hope that by allowing them to play their silly games, I was able to convince them that we Americans were not only trying to protect them, but to assure them that we also had a sense of humor.

Either that, or they decided that we were incompetent  buffoons.

That was okay, too.  I always felt that way in Viet Nam.

Saturday, June 30, 2018

Bullet-Stamping Impossible, says CA Supreme Court

I said it in 2004, and California is finally admitting that the proposition that you can identify crime evidence by stamping an unique serial number on EVERY BULLET is an impossible task!
The Latest: California Justices Toss Bullet Stamping Suit | California News | US News: SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — The Latest on a ruling by the California Supreme Court on a state bullet stamping law (all times local): 10:45 a.m. The California Supreme Court says state laws cannot be invalidated on the grounds that complying with them is impossible. The unanimous ruling on Thursday rejected a lawsuit by gun rights groups that sought to throw out a California law that requires new models of semi-automatic handguns to stamp identifying information on bullet casings. The groups argued that technology did not exist to meet the stamping requirements, and a law can't mandate something that's not possible.
(Actually, I think the term "Bullet Stamping" is misleading; the intent is not to serialize the actual projectile, but to emboss on the base of the cartridge a code which uniquely identifies the firearm which fired the cartridge.)

So .. the whole "Bullet-Stamping" thingie is no longer an issue in California.

Because the Supreme Court of the State of California doesn't care that it's technically impossible to comply with the law.   Which implies that the law will be enacted.

I addressed it twice in 2014: here and here.
(BTW .. most alternatives include stamping or embossing  unique serial numbers on the base of a cartridge when the gun is fired the identifiers would supposedly identify the guj from which the round was fired..   That doesn't do much for rounds fired from a revolver, which are not automatically ejected onto a 'crime scene".)
Embossed serial numbers from firing pins and breaches of firerms can easily be sanded down or filled in until the actual serial number is obfuscated to the point where they are unreliable in a Court of Law.

The last time I addressed the issue was 2014, when I finally admitted that California had their heads so far up their nether regions that they were unlikely to ever change their unrealistic rhetoric.

Things have changed.  Sort of.

 California DID ... finally ... take a closer look at the mechanics of the  issue and realize that they were wasting time, money and political power on a never-win issue.    So they said "do it anyway", and washed their hands of the issue.

ONE OF THE ISSUES in this inane law is that the details were .. unclear.

Ultimately, EVERY gun part which might be used to stamp an unique identifier onto either the primer or the base of a cartridge is readily (and cheaply) replaceable ... or subject to obfuscation by use of a file or an emery board..

There is no part of a semi-automatic pistol which cannot be replaced or altered .. even temporarily ... with a "Box Stock"  part within a matter of seconds.  Which makes the concept that imprinting a "serial number" on the base of a cartridge not only unrealistic, but laughable.

You may argue that the "frame" of a handgun is inviolate.  It isn't; if I have a file and sandpaper.

While California is working hard to accept 20th Century realities... they still have a long way to go.

But a "We Did Our Best" is not good enough in a court of law.'

And it's still anti-Second Amendment to register a gun.

(updated August 05, 2018, to recognize that the California Supreme court rejected an argument which would have invalidated the new law)